How could three "lunar" meteorites contain fossils?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Chapt 3, Fiberglass Experiment; Are the quasars nothing more than the last of the Supernova in view? #65; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: JSH: Morphic non-linear Factoring Random solved
From: Wretch Fossil on 7 May 2010 04:13 How could three lunar meteorites contain fossils ? Meteorites NWA5000, NWA2977, and NWA482 have all been classified as originating on the moon. However, they are all found to contain fossilized muscle fibers (Figures 1, 2, 3). The moon could not have had animals, for no humans ever lived there. So, the meteorites should have originated from Mars instead of the moon. There must be a problem in classifying those meteorites as originating on the moon. Figure 1: posted previously to show fossilized myofibrils in meteorite NWA5000 http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=28&f=1176846310&p=96 Figure 2: posted previously to show fossilized muscle fiber striations in meteorite NWA2977 http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=28&f=1176846316&p=100 Figure 3: new figure shows fossilized muscle fibers in meteorite NWA482 http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=28&f=1176855455&p=101 Photo source and credit for Figure 3 above: Look for photo NWA-482_160x-xpol-0003 in Mr. Tom Phillips gallery at http://www.meteorite.com/meteorite-gallery/meteorites-alpha_frame.htm
From: delorayn1 on 7 May 2010 14:18 On 07/05/2010 10:13, Wretch Fossil wrote: > How could three �lunar� meteorites contain fossils ? > > Meteorites NWA5000, NWA2977, and NWA482 have all been classified as > originating on the moon. However, they are all found to contain > fossilized muscle fibers (Figures 1, 2, 3). The moon could not have > had animals, for no humans ever lived there. So, the meteorites should > have originated from Mars instead of the moon. There must be a problem > in classifying those meteorites as originating on the moon. > > Figure 1: posted previously to show fossilized myofibrils in meteorite > NWA5000 > http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=28&f=1176846310&p=96 > > Figure 2: posted previously to show fossilized muscle fiber striations > in meteorite NWA2977 > http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=28&f=1176846316&p=100 > > Figure 3: new figure shows fossilized muscle fibers in meteorite > NWA482 > http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=28&f=1176855455&p=101 > > Photo source and credit for Figure 3 above: > Look for photo NWA-482_160x-xpol-0003 in Mr. Tom Phillips� gallery at > http://www.meteorite.com/meteorite-gallery/meteorites-alpha_frame.htm > > > I'm new here, but this 'Fossil' guy is really getting on my nerve. Are we all be a helpful community and pay him a visit to the psychiatrist?
From: spudnik on 7 May 2010 14:57
Moon could have supported life, a long time ago (i.e., smaller bodies have shorter lives), as is evidences by the remnants of plate tectonics (maria & highlands). > >http://www.meteorite.com/meteorite-gallery/meteorites-alpha_frame.htm thus: you call that, an explanation, "photons wedged apart by light rays?" an interesting relationship between two things that only exist as mathematics, both representing "rocks o'light!" > The Universe is like an ungulating soap bubble filled with > galaxies. Galaxies only SEEM to be moving away due the "aging" of the > light, or as I prefer, the wedging of the photons further apart by > crossing light rays. The only thing, other than... religion that > supports the Big Bang is the increasing redness of light at increasing > distancesand that is because of what I just explained. thus: how do you know, Lanczos did that, and how'd coordinates generate fractal patterns, and why would that matter?... if you believe in the Big Bang, then it seems to have had a period, as opposed to "frequency," of 13 billion years, but none of this seems to even be able to be quantized a la "biquaternions;" so, why bother? thus: you are pretending to define "complex 4-vectors," but "real" 4-vectors are part of the gross and unfinished porgramme of Minkowski, to "spatialize" time, while it is quite obvious that the "time part" is not symmetrical with the spatial coordinates, either in 4-vectors or quaternions. anyway, bi-quaternions would be 8-dimensional or octonions. and, it is all obfuscation, trying to insist that a phase-space tells you what time really is; it's very useful for seeing patterns "in" time though, as in electronics (although, NB, electronics is mostly done in "1-1" complex phase-space, instead of quaternions, as it could be, for some reason .-) maybe, all you and polysignosis need to do, is work the math of quaternions ... that'll take me wome time, as well. (I mean, what is the difference in labeling a coordinate axis with a "different sign" and a different letter, whether or not negatives are even needed?) --Light: A History! http://wlym.com |